Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What type of finance is it?   HP, PCP, Loan? They want her to ring so they can bully her into making payments she can't afford...unless she can record her calls then IMHO, I'd keep everything in writing. Is £400 SSP her only income? There's no chance they will justify taking half of that.   Lodge a formal complaint with them ASAP, exhaust it, and then you can escalate it sooner rather than later, ruddy sharks!  
    • Is all of this actually on the signage? Don't remember seeing that much detail on other threads.
    • If I have learnt one thing from this forum, it's not to call and communicate via email. I passed this info on to her and they are pushing for her to call them.    "Unfortunately, you will need to call us. The conversation won’t be so black and white as to therefore type over email. In a nutshell we can confirm that the request to not pay for 3 months we cannot put in place"  I emailed them back on her behalf and said that what ever is discussed over the phone will need to be put in an email so that she can review it properly. No decisions will be made on that phone call.    "Once we speak to you on the phone we will follow up with an email to confirm the options discussed. [Phone number]"   Why are they pushing for a phone call? If its not so black and white, why can they then follow up with an email?  
    • Appreciate input Andy, updated: IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;     I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.   1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt 12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

DVLA's endless investigation


space litter
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5646 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello to everybody and let me start my rant. It seems that I have bought a car with a bit of a history and now I can’t get V5 and tax the car. DVLA says that the VIN mismatches their records so they want to inspect the vehicle. Well, apparently they are not too keen to do so, as it has been four months since they have received my application. (I mean “my application” because the man who’d sold the car did not send his V5 to DVLA. It’s just amazing how stupid I was not to see those obvious things that the seller was not very familiar with his "own house", that he had only one set of keys, that the garage name on the number plates was different from the dealers name on the car windows, and finally that one of the two VIN plaques was removed from the car! How could I forget to ring the car check company and verify VIN? Beware, without this telephone call any internet car check is absolutely useless!!! I can only say that that bloke must be a professional, because the logbook, the service book and the MOT all looked genuine. I actually asked DVLA people if they spotted anything wrong with the VC5/2, but they said they shredded it just as they received it. They apparently always destroy these papers before checking them.) Ok, even though DVLA says over the phone that once they see the car they may simply issue the new set of number plates, I know how it will end up. DVLA will send the local police (probably after another 4 months delay), who will take the car to the insurance company and who will auction it the same day. So at the moment all I can do is to drive without road tax and wait for that day. I know how it sounds, but as long as my insurance is valid I don’t hurt other people. Initially I was a bit irritated by the DVLA lazy attitude. I used to phone them strait to their investigation team (I have their direct number if somebody needs it), only to hear that my caseworker was off for the whole week. I even submitted a proposal onto BetterRegulation.gov.uk suggesting a grace period for the road tax if DVLA delayed the documents. Obviously, no luck there. The success rate for the DVLA-related proposals is 4% compared to 28% for the DVLA-unrelated ones (and that’s before taking into account “responded by alternative means” which still means rejection). But now I begin to think that this delay is my golden chance to get few pennies back. Please don’t laugh, I know my IQ must be well below average, but I thought maybe I could sell the car to somewhere outside EU. So my main question is: is that totally illegal? I mean, I know I am not the registered keeper of the car, and then I sell it to a country where UK registration problems don’t matter. Can I be taken to court by DVLA or the insurance company for doing this? Frankly, I could not bother less about the insurance company “losing money”. They must have already written this car off (and the car itself is a bit dated and recently it has barely passed MOT). Only last week my own insurer charged me £16 administration fee for the change of the address, and I moved to a better postcode. I still remember that two years ago RAC passed my data to Norwich Union (they had the same owner), which had its own breakdown service. Then the last year NU automatically subscribed me for their service and I noticed that I was paying twice only when it was too late – haven’t I already told you about my IQ? It’s just to illustrate how I love these people and that I probably won’t have sleepless nights over some insurance company not seizing my car. But will they hold me to account for that? It’s rather a theoretical question, but it would be soothing to know that I still have a choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me, but I am not sure exactly what you are asking.

Let's start at the beginning. You have bought a car, and have not received a V5C? You say that DVLA have shredded a V5C/2? I assume that this is the one you received from the seller, and sent it to DVLA along with an application for a V5C?

You say that your only option is to drive this car without road tax, I would not advise this. Another option to consider is to not use the car until this matter is resolved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having road tax does not invalidate your insurance. That is a myth.

We've got a stalker!:eek:

 

You've got proof of that have you?

 

 

 

Well maybe this will put you off driving without tax

 

What will happen

 

If you don’t tax or SORN your vehicle you could be stopped by the police.

You’ll get an automatic penalty of £80, as well as paying for a new tax disc and any arrears of vehicle tax you owe.

You could also get a County Court Judgement against you, and be fined a minimum of £1000.

The maximum penalty for making a false declaration by declaring SORN when the vehicle is actually used or kept on a public road is £5000 and two years imprisonment.

Your vehicle could be clamped by one of DVLA's wheelclamping partners. You’ll need to pay to have your vehicle released as well as producing a valid tax disc or a surety fee if no disc is available. If you fail to pay, your vehicle will be impounded, incurring storage charges. If you don’t pay the release or storage fees, your vehicle could be crushed or sold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having no Vehicle Excise Licence does not invalidate a persons insurance. You can insure a vehicle without tax, but not tax a vehicle without insurance. The only things that would invalidate a persons insurance is when they fail to disclose something that would affect their premium, such as penalty points on their licence or modifications to a vehicle.

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Callumsgran,

 

There are times when it is perfectly lawful to drive an untaxed vehicle - it it has exempt status during those times.

 

The driver does however, need to be insured to use the vehicle on the road.

 

It is a myth that no VED (road tax) or MoT invalidates insurance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

... it's time to get back to the OP's original post.

 

 

Hello to everybody and let me start my rant. It seems that I have bought a car with a bit of a history and now I can’t get V5 and tax the car. DVLA says that the VIN mismatches their records so they want to inspect the vehicle.

 

 

Who have you been in touch with at DVLA? Have you tried a local VRO (Vehicle Registration Office)? Another thing to bear in mind is the possibility that DVLA recorded it incorrectly on their records when it was first registered.

 

 

 

Well, apparently they are not too keen to do so, as it has been four months since they have received my application. (I mean “my application” because the man who’d sold the car did not send his V5 to DVLA.

 

 

 

So it's 4 months since you sent off the application for a V5? Have you chased them up or is this where they have said one won't be issued until the vehicle has been inspected?

 

 

 

It’s just amazing how stupid I was not to see those obvious things that the seller was not very familiar with his "own house", that he had only one set of keys, that the garage name on the number plates was different from the dealers name on the car windows, and finally that one of the two VIN plaques was removed from the car!

 

 

 

It's a tough way to learn. Which of the VINS was missing from the vehicle, was it the visible VIN that is usually in the windscreen or the stamped in one that is usually on the engine bay bulkhead or on the floor of the vehicle by the drivers seat?

 

 

 

How could I forget to ring the car check company and verify VIN? Beware, without this telephone call any internet car check is absolutely useless!!!

 

 

 

Are you refrring to a HPI check?

 

 

I can only say that that bloke must be a professional, because the logbook, the service book and the MOT all looked genuine. I actually asked DVLA people if they spotted anything wrong with the VC5/2, but they said they shredded it just as they received it.

 

 

 

Have they confirmed this apparant policy in writing to you?

 

 

 

Ok, even though DVLA says over the phone that once they see the car they may simply issue the new set of number plates, I know how it will end up. DVLA will send the local police (probably after another 4 months delay), who will take the car to the insurance company and who will auction it the same day.

 

 

 

If there are doubts as to the true identity of the car then it will be checked by the police, that is normal procedure.

 

 

 

So at the moment all I can do is to drive without road tax and wait for that day. I know how it sounds, but as long as my insurance is valid I don’t hurt other people.

 

 

 

If you have told the insurer you are the registered keeper of the vehicle and you have yet to receive the V5 because of the pending examination then that could cause problems with the insurance.

 

 

 

 

But now I begin to think that this delay is my golden chance to get few pennies back. Please don’t laugh, I know my IQ must be well below average, but I thought maybe I could sell the car to somewhere outside EU. So my main question is: is that totally illegal? I mean, I know I am not the registered keeper of the car, and then I sell it to a country where UK registration problems don’t matter. Can I be taken to court by DVLA or the insurance company for doing this?

 

 

 

There could be big problems if the provenance of the car is suspect and yet you make an attempt to sell it on.

Edited by jonni2bad
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for your replies. It is good to hear that not having road tax does not invalidate the insurance. I think I can recall this question being on the theoretical test. It is also true that one can drive to and from VOSA for prearranged appointments with just MOT and insurance. And ideally, if a tree falls on a SORNed but insured car, the policy should pay something out. I did not mention to my insurer that I am not the registered keeper of the car, but don’t they see it on their system? Anyway, with my car being a clone, some details from two cars inevitably overlap. For example, my car appears as taxed on the system (because the original one is taxed – that is what DVLA repeatedly tells me is another reason why they are not in a hurry) and MOTed (the MOT is mine – as I can see it on the VOSA website). Before I renewed the MOT the VOSA had showed a discrepancy between my MOT number and theirs. I asked DVLA people about the reason for the mismatch – whether my MOT was an outright fake or it was just a mix up of the details from two cars. They were unable to tell – possibly because they had not seen my MOT paperwork – but I felt they were not interested much. Then having heard that DVLA shredded the V5C/2 I sent them, I’ve just stopped bothering.

Well, I may have more questions to DVLA. How was it possible a garage issued duplicate number plates and these were still not seen as stolen on the system? How was it possible to tax this car with these very registration numbers last year? Why the reference number on V5C/2 they destroyed (I kept a photocopy of) is not traceable (unlike the number in the V11 tax reminder form)? But my impression now is that such a situation is quite typical and there is no one to answer these questions. IMHO, the system works as follows. Thieves can manipulate the documents and number plates quite easily, and that would require quite an effort from DVLA to investigate the matter. So instead the focus is on the correctness of the VIN. It would be more difficult for the criminals to make high quality VIN plates with numbers exactly matching those assigned to the particular registration number. Therefore HPI and other car check companies consider the correctness of the VIN as a necessary and sufficient condition to support you legally if any query arises. DVLA also assumes that you make sure the VIN is correct; otherwise it’s just all hell breaks loose for them. So when you do a car check, it is absolutely essential that you know the VIN and you can type it in. The car check company will never tell you the VIN (even though anyone can see it under the windscreen in my car). So the only way is to type this number before you go to the viewing or you need to phone the company as you view the car. I did not do it and so my car check became worthless. After all, as we know it, it is always a buyer’s responsibility. If, as they say, out of 400,000 cars stolen every year 120,000 are not recovered, and of those 40,000 end up being sold to unlucky people, the easiest thing for the insurance industry is to trace the buyers. That’s just how it works. And it’s good for our taxes. Who wants to pay for the police going after every case? So just make sure your VIN is right.

What does make things looking especially grim in my particular case is that DVLA does not want me to do the visual inspection of the vehicle (VIC) at my local VOSA. They specifically told me not to go to VOSA for some reason. Well, certainly the car will fail VIC, then by law I will be allowed to drive it back home and then I WILL KNOW. ((It will surely fail, because the VIN is missing from the chassis. I fear that, seeing this, no one will ever bother to check if the engine number is right match for the other VIN plate. The engine number is not easily seen on this particular model. Well, DVLA can’t even tell me if they are going to check the identity of my car and all numbers against the car that has my registration plates or the car that has my VIN. Why not, what sensitive information is there? But every time I ask I hear a different however very unclear response.)) What DVLA wants is to do its own check, apparently having all powers to impound the car. Therefore I cannot even arrange the visual inspection at the nearest DVLA office. They tell me to keep it off the road and wait for the DVLA or police officers to come to my place. This scenario is already described in the internet, so the outcome is that police comes and takes the keys and the car. The only difference is that it normally takes less than four months plus.

I have this “grace time period” with not being the registered keeper. So I was just wondering what should happen if a tree fell on the car. Or if I hit a signpost? Or if I sold the car to the scrapyard? That would recover about 10% of all costs btw. Would the insurance company that say owned the car sue me for the money? I inherited a dent on the car – do I have to pay for the repair work too? And what about the interest earned over these four months? That’s why I was asking about shipping the car abroad – however stupidly it should sound. It is not technically easy to do, because one needs the registration certificate in order to drive across the border. But if I sold it abroad I would loose less, even after paying all possible costs to the insurer. Everybody would win, even the insurance company (although I don’t care too much about this aspect I must say). The company won’t claw back much with the auction. One should be completely out of his mind to buy this car – even if taxable, it would be unsellable at later stage.

So what are my rights and responsibilities at the moment? What I would appreciate most was if DVLA simply told me if the car with this VIN was stolen or not. As long as they are refusing to answer this question I begin to think that in fact I have zero responsibility and they just don’t want me to realize it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...